CONFLICTS WITH NATIVE AMERICANS

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "CONFLICTS WITH NATIVE AMERICANS"

Antony Eaton
5 years ago
Views:

1 NO FEDERAL ARMY By contrast, the Massachusetts legislature imposed a tightly limited currency and high taxes, triggering formation of a small army of farmers led by Daniel Shays, a former Revolutionary War army captain. In a bid to take over the Massachusetts statehouse, Shays and others demanded that foreclosures and unfair mortgages be dropped. Troops were called out to suppress the rebellion, but the federal government took notice. Absence of a uniform, stable currency also disrupted trade among the states and with other countries. Not only did the value of paper currency vary from state to state, but some states (like New York and Virginia) levied duties on products entering their ports from other states, thereby provoking retaliatory actions. The states could say, as had the federal superintendent of finance, that "our public credit is gone." To compound their problems, the newly independent states, having separated violently from England, no longer received favored treatment at British ports. When Ambassador John Adams tried to negotiate a commercial treaty in 1785, the British refused on the grounds that the individual states would not be bound by it. The British were also angered by the failure of Americans to pay for property confiscated during the Revolution. A weak central government, without the power to back its policies with military strength, was inevitably handicapped in foreign affairs as well. The British refused to withdraw their troops from the forts and trading posts in the new nation's Northwest Territory, as they had agreed to do in the peace treaty of To make matters worse, British officers on the northern boundaries and Spanish officers to the south supplied arms to various Indian tribes and encouraged them to attack American settlers. The Spanish, who controlled Florida and Louisiana, as well as all territory west of the Mississippi River, also refused to allow Western farmers to use the port of New Orleans to ship their produce.

2 CONFLICTS WITH NATIVE AMERICANS Most of the Indians east of the Mississippi River now perceived the colonial pioneers as a greater threat than the British government. Thus northern tribes, especially those influenced by Mohawk chief Thayendanegea (Joseph Brant), generally sided with the Crown during the American War for Independence. In 1777, they joined the Tories and the British in the unsuccessful offensives of John Burgoyne and Barry St. Leger in upstate New York. Western Pennsylvania and New York became savage battlegrounds as the conflict spread to the Wyoming and Cherry valleys. Strong American forces finally penetrated the heart of Iroquois territory, leaving a wide swath of destruction in their wake. In the Midwest, George Rogers Clark captured strategic Vincennes for the Americans, but British agents based at Detroit continued to sponsor Tory and Indian forays as far south as Kentucky. The Americans resumed the initiative in 1782, when Clark marched northwest into Shawnee and Delaware country, ransacking villages and inflicting several stinging defeats upon the Indians. To the south, the British backed resistance among the Cherokees, Chickasaws, Creeks, and Choctaws but quickly forgot their former allies following the signing of the Treaty of Paris (1783). By setting the boundaries of the newly recognized United States at the Mississippi River and the Great Lakes, that treaty virtually ensured future conflicts between whites and resident tribes. In 1790, Miami chief Little Turtle routed several hundred men led by Josiah Harmar along the Maumee River. Arthur St. Clair s column suffered an even more ignominious defeat on the Wabash River the following year; only in 1794 did Anthony Wayne gain revenge at the Battle of Fallen Timbers. Yet resistance to white expansion in the Old Northwest continued as a Shawnee chief, Tecumseh, molded a large Indian confederation based at Prophetstown. While Tecumseh was away seeking additional support, William Henry Harrison burned the village after a stalemate at the Battle of Tippecanoe in 1811.

3 INABILITY TO LEVY FEDERAL TAXES The period between the adoption of the Articles of Confederation in 1781 and the drafting of the new Constitution in 1787 was one of weakness, dissension and turmoil. Under the Articles of Confederation, no provisions were made for an executive branch to enforce the laws nor for a national court system to interpret them. A legislative Congress was the sole organ of the national government, but it had no power to force the states to do anything against their will. It could -- theoretically -- declare war and raise an army, but it could not force any state to meet its assigned quota for troops or for the arms and equipment needed to support them. It looked to the states for the income needed to finance its activities, but it could not punish a state for not contributing its share of the federal budget. Control of taxation and tariffs was left to the states, and each state could issue its own currency. In disputes between states -- and there were many unsettled quarrels over state boundaries -- Congress played the role of mediator and judge, but could not require the state to accept its decisions. The result was virtual chaos. Without the power to collect taxes, the federal government plunged into debt. Seven of the 13 states printed large quantities of paper money -- high in face value but low in real purchasing power -- in order to pay veteran soldiers and a variety of creditors, and to settle debts between small farmers and large plantation owners.

Such things as "Post Treaty" British-led invasions in the Mohawk Valley and other parts of the frontier were outright violations of the terms and spirit of the 1783 Treaty of Paris.

4 Such things as "Post Treaty" British-led invasions in the Mohawk Valley and other parts of the frontier were outright violations of the terms and spirit of the 1783 Treaty of Paris. In addition, British troops retained control of Detroit and other forts in the Ohio Valley. These actions constituted outright aggressive actions by both irregulars and regular British troops and are definitely at odds with the terms and supposedly good faith agreements of both the King's proclamation and the Treaty of Paris. Whether this was an unstated policy of the King or his ministers is moot since it was patently in violation of the Treaty upon which peace was supposedly established. The only excuse given that I can find is that the British claimed that they had to stay on because the fledgling nation could not maintain order and control of the Indians. However, there is no mention made by them that Indian raids were normally led by official representatives of the Crown and that supplies for the raids were from the British controlled forts on treaty ceded United States territory. This indicated that it was government policy at some level. The King and Parliament may have indicated and even desired an honest application of the terms of the treaty. However, has it not always been true that what the head of State wanted is not necessarily what it got? Too often and evident in this war was that the King desired a certain course of action from his generals in America but their interpretation of those orders frequently met their desires, not those of the King, or of Parliament.

5 MASSIVE WAR DEBT During the American Revolution, a cash-strapped Continental Congress accepted loans from France. Paying off these and other debts incurred during the Revolution proved one of the major challenges of the post-independence period. The new U.S. Government attempted to pay off these debts in a timely manner, but the debts were at times a source of diplomatic tension. The Continental Congress In order to pay for its significant expenditures during the Revolution, Congress had two options: print more money or obtain loans to meet the budget deficit. In practice it did both, but relied more on the printing of money, which led to hyperinflation. At that time, Congress lacked the authority to levy taxes, and to do so would have risked alienating an American public that had gone to war with the British over the issue of unjust taxation. During the Revolution, the French Government also provided the Americans with loans, eventually totaling over two million dollars, most of which were negotiated by Benjamin Franklin. John Adams also secured a loan from Dutch bankers in After fighting between the Americans and the British ended in 1783, the new U.S. Government established under the Articles of Confederation needed to pay off its debt, but lacked sufficient tax authority to secure any revenue. The government struggled to pay off the loans, stopping payments of interest to France in 1785 and defaulting on further installments that were due in The United States also owed money to the Spanish Government and private Dutch investors, but focused on paying off the Dutch because Amsterdam remained the most likely source of future loans, which the United States successfully obtained in 1787 and 1788, despite its precarious financial state. Under the U.S. Constitution of 1789, the new federal government enjoyed increased authority to manage U.S. finances and to raise revenues through taxation. Responsibility for managing debts fell to Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton placed U.S. finances on firmer ground, allowing for the U.S. Government to negotiate new loans at lower interest rates. In addition, the United States began to make regular payments on in its French debts starting in 1790, and also provided an emergency advance to assist the French in addressing the 1791 slave revolt that began the Haitian Revolution. Although the federal government was able to resume debt payments, total federal expenditures exceeded revenues during many years in the 1790s. Hamilton therefore sought additional loans on Dutch capital markets, although the improved U.S. financial situation made these loans easier to obtain. These private loans from Dutch bankers also helped pay off loans owed to the Spanish Government, back pay owed to foreign officers, and U.S. diplomatic expenses in Europe. In 1795, the United States was finally able to settle its debts with the French Government with the help of James Swan, an American banker who privately assumed French debts at a slightly higher interest rate. Swan then resold these debts at a profit on domestic U.S. markets. The United States no longer owed money to foreign governments, although it continued to owe money to private investors both in the United States and in Europe.

6 VOTING SYSTEM Article 5 of the Articles of Confederation States can send between two and seven delegates to Congress. A delegate cannot serve for more than three years in every six-year period. A delegate cannot hold another position in the United States government for which he receives any kind of payment or benefit, either directly or indirectly. Each state has one vote in Congress, irrespective of how many delegates are sent. Each state can decide how it wants to select its delegates, but it must do so once a year, prior to the annual meeting of Congress on the first Monday of November. Delegates' freedom of speech is protected while they are serving in Congress. Delegates may not be arrested or put in prison while they are in Congress, or traveling to and from, unless they have committed treason, a felony, or have been guilty of breach of the peace. Commentary Article 5 strongly supports the sovereignty of states clause of Article 2. Instead of outlining a national system of elections to Congress, which would be more reflective of the overall population of the United States, the Articles of Confederation require that each state provide at least two delegates, regardless of the amount of land, population size, or wealth of that state. Although John Dickinson's original draft of the Articles of Confederation included equal representation in Congress regardless of state size, other conservatives were deeply troubled by the implications of this form of representation. This issue became another debate between the radicals on one side and the conservatives on the other. The radicals argued that since the government of the United States was a loose confederation of equal and sovereign states, they must be equally represented in that confederation. Furthermore, radicals insisted that Congress did not have the authority to determine how elections were to be carried out in the individual states, each of which had its own constitution and means for holding elections.

Understanding Washington s Domestic and Foreign Policies

Understanding Washington s Domestic and Foreign Policies 1783: Treaty of Paris ended the American Revolution Despite the treaty, Britain: Continued to maintain frontier forts along the Great Lakes Continued their alliances with Native American tribes 1787: The